An example of a "bad" card that is really good is Arcane Intellect. Now everyone would agree that Arcane Intellect is a good card and it is one of the most played cards of all time. But mathematically, it is 1.5 Mana for each card. There are plenty of cards that draw 1 card for 1 Mana, even with upsides like Power Word: Shield, or tutor cards that draw multiple specific cards for less than 1.5 Mana per card.
What cards draw 1 card for 1 mana, straight up? Power Word: Shield is conditional, as you cannot play it without any minions on board (unless you wan't to grant that upside to your opponent). I can't think of any card draw effects I'd rather have over AI. And even in regard to mana per card drawn, Arcane Intellect combines two draws into one card, which has mana value in its own right.
I can't say there aren't wild cards I am missing here, but of the draw-cards in basic and classic, AI comes out on top mana-value wise against other options like Shield Block, Mortal Coil, Shiv etc. Consider that Nourish was "1.66" mana per draw back when it was mostly used for draw, pre-nerf.
I'd say Arcane Intellect is a good card, not a "bad card that is good".
There are plenty of tutor cards that draw cards for a cheaper price than AI. like Forge of Souls or Juicy Psychmelon, or Pre-nerf Raiding Party. Then there is also UI, where the card draw is technically free as the other stats already make up 10 Mana. The new 5 Mana 5/5 dragon draws 1 for 0.5!
Nourishwas mostly played for Mana Crystals when UI was released.
To further clarify what I mean, Blizzard could print a card like 2 Mana "If you are holding a Dragon (or any other minor condition), draw 2 cards" or 2 Mana "Draw 2 Mage Minions from your deck" or "Draw 2 Spells that cost (5) or more". The conditions or requirements on such cards would be minor but they could very well exist by the parameters of Hearthstone, and would replace AI or make it a secondary inclusion in dedicated archetypes.
I completely agree with you that AI is a good card, but not due to its numbers but due to being a key gameplan component of many decks. And yes there are much worse draw cards like post-nerf Nourish, Novice Engineer or Sprint.
Just a fun thread. I give two examples to show you what I mean.
First example is Malorne. As a 7 Mana 9/7 he has above curve stats and the card text is an upside. In vacuum space Malorne is undeniably a good card. But even in the set where it was printed, it was already outclassed in every aspect by the same cost Dr. Boom and thus never played.
What exactly about Malorne is good???
His effect makes it slightly harder to fatigue a Druid.. That's literally the only benefit. Otherwise his stats and costs were always about the same as War Golem. A card often heralded as the worst fucking card in the entire game.
His only usage was being a semi decent body from RNG cards that spawned or drafted Malorne. He's never been a "good" card that's bad. He's always been an utterly trash legendary
War golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now. There are much worse cards in the classic/basic set and even worse in other sets.
Also I do play Malorne in my Reno druid deck and he is definitely a "bad good card" not even close to being trash. It's a win condition when my opponent burns my Jade Idols.
War Golem has always been considered the weakest card. Regardless of whether or not you use it in a deck.
Here's a tweet from Ben Brode talking about how he made it to be useless.
You are absolutely correct, War Golem is the weakest card in the entire game. The formula to calculate hoch much mana is spent on minion stats is (Attack+Health-1)/2). 0.5 values can then be rounded up or down because half Mana crystals don't exist.
(7+7-1)/2=6.5
So War Golem is 6.5 Mana of stats and he has no card text, but costs 7 Mana.
He shares that attribute with Magma Rager and Am'gam Rager who are both 2.5 Mana vanillas rounded up to 3. But those two, being elementals and having synergies attached to their stats (1 Attack or 1 Health synergies), are a little stronger than poor War Golem.
Now If you use my formula above on Malorne, you will see that he couldn't be much stronger as he already is above curve in stats. And back in his own set days, that meant a lot. Just...Boom was the same but better.
War Golem on the other hand could be better. A 7 Mana 7/8 Vanilla would be very possible, and even an 8/8 (7.5 Mana rounded down) is within the limits of Hearthstone.
I mainly used Malorne [/card]as an example because there are plenty of [card]Malornes in every set, cards that by using the formula above should be good but are not. Actually Gruul is the first Malorne, already outclassed by Ragnaros, the Fire Lord.
But you can give other examples it doesn't just have to be all about stats. Just write what you think :)
More examples:
Good card that is bad: Light's Justice if Paladin had Weapon Buffs, this would be strong. 1 Mana, 4 Damage (compare Heroic Strike), with buffs the shift towards durability would be an upside
Bad card that is good: Leeroy Jenkins I mean, the class with Fireball doesn't play him for a reason. But reducing your opponents life to 0 is what wins you the game and the other classes burst options are much more limited. Leeroy clearly has an awful statline when compared with other Charge Minions and also a drawback attached to it, but the extreme shift towards Attack unfound on other Charge cards make him a strong source of burst damage for many decks.
An example of a "bad" card that is really good is Arcane Intellect. Now everyone would agree that Arcane Intellect is a good card and it is one of the most played cards of all time. But mathematically, it is 1.5 Mana for each card. There are plenty of cards that draw 1 card for 1 Mana, even with upsides like Power Word: Shield, or tutor cards that draw multiple specific cards for less than 1.5 Mana per card.
What cards draw 1 card for 1 mana, straight up? Power Word: Shield is conditional, as you cannot play it without any minions on board (unless you wan't to grant that upside to your opponent). I can't think of any card draw effects I'd rather have over AI. And even in regard to mana per card drawn, Arcane Intellect combines two draws into one card, which has mana value in its own right.
I can't say there aren't wild cards I am missing here, but of the draw-cards in basic and classic, AI comes out on top mana-value wise against other options like Shield Block, Mortal Coil, Shiv etc. Consider that Nourish was "1.66" mana per draw back when it was mostly used for draw, pre-nerf.
I'd say Arcane Intellect is a good card, not a "bad card that is good".
There are plenty of tutor cards that draw cards for a cheaper price than AI. like Forge of Souls or Juicy Psychmelon, or Pre-nerf Raiding Party. Then there is also UI, where the card draw is technically free as the other stats already make up 10 Mana. The new 5 Mana 5/5 dragon draws 1 for 0.5!
Nourishwas mostly played for Mana Crystals when UI was released.
To further clarify what I mean, Blizzard could print a card like 2 Mana "If you are holding a Dragon (or any other minor condition), draw 2 cards" or 2 Mana "Draw 2 Mage Minions from your deck" or "Draw 2 Spells that cost (5) or more". The conditions or requirements on such cards would be minor but they could very well exist by the parameters of Hearthstone, and would replace AI or make it a secondary inclusion in dedicated archetypes.
I completely agree with you that AI is a good card, but not due to its numbers but due to being a key gameplan component of many decks. And yes there are much worse draw cards like post-nerf Nourish, Novice Engineer or Sprint.
I still don't agree with the sentiment that there are several better card draw effects in the game (or any in standard). At least in my opinion.
I grant you UI, but UI is also perhaps one of the best cards in Hearthstone history. It's also on such a larger scale (mana- and effect wise) that they are less comparable, I think.
UI is also the reason (which I can see) that Nourish was pushed towards ramp - other than this period of co-existence, and in specifically Ramp Druid decks, it's my impression that it's been a draw card unless you 1) have another Nourish in hand, or 2) already have your powerful 7-8-9 mana cards in hand.
Pre-nerf Raiding Party was perhaps better, but also doubly conditional (combo + draw specifically pirates). Post-nerf it's much worse than AI, imo.
Forge of Souls is very conditional, and was at most a one-off in weapon heavy decks. You don't want to draw weapons successively or at the same time, because you can only make use of one of them in a turn.
EDIT: Psychmelon is on paper decent for combo or ramp decks, but hasn't seen a lot of play outside Maly/Tog shenanigans, I believe? I just don't think you want to draw your most expensive cards five turns before you can make use of them, unless you're playing specifically combo decks.
Just a fun thread. I give two examples to show you what I mean.
First example is Malorne. As a 7 Mana 9/7 he has above curve stats and the card text is an upside. In vacuum space Malorne is undeniably a good card. But even in the set where it was printed, it was already outclassed in every aspect by the same cost Dr. Boom and thus never played.
What exactly about Malorne is good???
His effect makes it slightly harder to fatigue a Druid.. That's literally the only benefit. Otherwise his stats and costs were always about the same as War Golem. A card often heralded as the worst fucking card in the entire game.
His only usage was being a semi decent body from RNG cards that spawned or drafted Malorne. He's never been a "good" card that's bad. He's always been an utterly trash legendary
War golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now. There are much worse cards in the classic/basic set and even worse in other sets.
Also I do play Malorne in my Reno druid deck and he is definitely a "bad good card" not even close to being trash. It's a win condition when my opponent burns my Jade Idols.
War Golem has always been considered the weakest card. Regardless of whether or not you use it in a deck.
Here's a tweet from Ben Brode talking about how he made it to be useless.
Look at that vanilla 4 mana 6/3 from the Gadgetzan expansion. Enough said. You are not correct. Please do not insist, I have more examples. Many cards are made to be useless and war golem isn't the worst of them and Ben Brode has never ever ever ever said that war golem is "the worst card", this is you and you alone.
Not gonna talk about the op's shitty formula that only takes stats into account and means absolutely nothing.
(aka you’re right but that doesn’t make this a bad thread)
I didn't say it was a bad thread. On the contrary, it's already proving to be a fine opportunity for people to learn why they should have known better in the first place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
war golem isn't the worst of them and Ben Brode has never ever ever ever said that war golem is "the worst card", this is you and you alone.
It is not important if War Golem is the actual, literal, very worst card. That's not the point of this conversation.
The point is that it's terrible, and a good player doesn't need to experiment with it to know that. Hannya showed you an actual tweet in which Brode says "it might as well not exist," which is exactly the point he was trying to make.
When you take an obviously (though mildly) exaggerated statement and parse it as literal, it's not Hannya who ends up looking foolish.
I mainly used Malorne [/card]as an example because there are plenty of [card]Malornes in every set, cards that by using the formula above should be good but are not. Actually Gruul is the first Malorne, already outclassed by Ragnaros, the Fire Lord.
Gruul is an awful card. And not because Rag outclasses it.
Look at that vanilla 4 mana 6/3 from the Gadgetzan expansion. Enough said. You are not correct. Please do not insist, I have more examples. Many cards are made to be useless and war golem isn't the worst of them and Ben Brode has never ever ever ever said that war golem is "the worst card", this is you and you alone.
Not gonna talk about the op's shitty formula that only takes stats into account and means absolutely nothing.
Obviously you're super reasonable after the OP proves you wrong, and being given a direct quote from the former Game Director stating that the card is utterly useless. Totally open to a change of open.
Mr "War Golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now."
By the way, there's a reason your Reno deck is hard stuck at 20.
I mainly used Malorne [/card]as an example because there are plenty of [card]Malornes in every set, cards that by using the formula above should be good but are not. Actually Gruul is the first Malorne, already outclassed by Ragnaros, the Fire Lord.
Gruul is an awful card. And not because Rag outclasses it.
Seems you haven't been around in the Classic meta days. The classic set doesn't have many high cost minions. Alexstrasza and Malygos were used for combos, but the other high cost neutral legendaries like Gruul or Onyxia were precisely not played because Ragnaros was straight up better than them.
Gruul even had a combo back then with the unnerfed perma stealth rogue hof card.
I mainly used Malorne [/card]as an example because there are plenty of [card]Malornes in every set, cards that by using the formula above should be good but are not. Actually Gruul is the first Malorne, already outclassed by Ragnaros, the Fire Lord.
Gruul is an awful card. And not because Rag outclasses it.
Seems you haven't been around in the Classic meta days. The classic set doesn't have many high cost minions. Alexstrasza and Malygos were used for combos, but the other high cost neutral legendaries like Gruul or Onyxia were precisely not played because Ragnaros was straight up better than them.
Gruul even had a combo back then with the unnerfed perma stealth rogue hof card.
You're right, I wasn't around until after Whisper of the Old Gods. But I can't see a reason why you would have to put an 8-9 mana legendary in every deck? So I'm just saying Rag likely wasn't the reason why Kruul didn't see play. I think Onyxia is miles better, because Kruul is really, really bad.
Conceal only gave stealth until your next turn - so that would be a two card, 9 mana combo to attack with an 8/8... one turn delayed. Sounds bad. But again, I didn't play all the way back when.
EDIT: Forgot it used to be perma-stealth, pre-nerf. And 0 mana. And it still sounds bad with Kruul :P
Just a fun thread. I give two examples to show you what I mean.
First example is Malorne. As a 7 Mana 9/7 he has above curve stats and the card text is an upside. In vacuum space Malorne is undeniably a good card. But even in the set where it was printed, it was already outclassed in every aspect by the same cost Dr. Boom and thus never played.
What exactly about Malorne is good???
His effect makes it slightly harder to fatigue a Druid.. That's literally the only benefit. Otherwise his stats and costs were always about the same as War Golem. A card often heralded as the worst fucking card in the entire game.
His only usage was being a semi decent body from RNG cards that spawned or drafted Malorne. He's never been a "good" card that's bad. He's always been an utterly trash legendary
War golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now. There are much worse cards in the classic/basic set and even worse in other sets.
Also I do play Malorne in my Reno druid deck and he is definitely a "bad good card" not even close to being trash. It's a win condition when my opponent burns my Jade Idols.
War Golem has always been considered the weakest card. Regardless of whether or not you use it in a deck.
Here's a tweet from Ben Brode talking about how he made it to be useless.
He said it could be removed, but that's because it's arguably the most vanilla card in the game. But theres definitely worse than just a 7 man and 7/7. Silverback patriarch is arguably a dead card more often. The nerfed arcane golem is 100% worse, and would lose you way more games than a vanilla 7/7 that at the very least must be answered.
Look at that vanilla 4 mana 6/3 from the Gadgetzan expansion. Enough said. You are not correct. Please do not insist, I have more examples. Many cards are made to be useless and war golem isn't the worst of them and Ben Brode has never ever ever ever said that war golem is "the worst card", this is you and you alone.
Not gonna talk about the op's shitty formula that only takes stats into account and means absolutely nothing.
Obviously you're super reasonable after the OP proves you wrong, and being given a direct quote from the former Game Director stating that the card is utterly useless. Totally open to a change of open.
Mr "War Golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now."
By the way, there's a reason your Reno deck is hard stuck at 20.
Talk about reasonable. My point has never been that war golem is worth playing. Just that it is not the worst game in the game, as I proved, and that Ben brode never said anything like that in his tweet, and I've never seen before someone claim war golem is the absolute worst card, I'm not proven wrong, despite being off topic. And the op's formula is absolutely worthless I'm sorry to insist. According to his formula, a vanilla 10 mana 0/500 would be the best card in the game.
Now let me apologize and leave, this is a nice thread and I don't mean to ruin it.
Look at that vanilla 4 mana 6/3 from the Gadgetzan expansion. Enough said. You are not correct. Please do not insist, I have more examples. Many cards are made to be useless and war golem isn't the worst of them and Ben Brode has never ever ever ever said that war golem is "the worst card", this is you and you alone.
Not gonna talk about the op's shitty formula that only takes stats into account and means absolutely nothing.
Obviously you're super reasonable after the OP proves you wrong, and being given a direct quote from the former Game Director stating that the card is utterly useless. Totally open to a change of open.
Mr "War Golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now."
By the way, there's a reason your Reno deck is hard stuck at 20.
Talk about reasonable. My point has never been that war golem is worth playing. Just that it is not the worst game in the game, as I proved, and that Ben brode never said anything like that in his tweet, and I've never seen before someone claim war golem is the absolute worst card, I'm not proven wrong, despite being off topic. And the op's formula is absolutely worthless I'm sorry to insist. According to his formula, a vanilla 10 mana 0/500 would be the best card in the game.
Now let me apologize and leave, this is a nice thread and I don't mean to ruin it.
Ehh it's not my formula it is just how things are.
It's like saying that you don't like that 2+2=4.
And a Vanilla 10 Mana 0/500 would be completely busted and also not possible by the formula. There are cards like Lady in White or Inner Fire you know.
But it would certainly not be the best card in the game as stats aren't everything.
When it comes to Vanille minions, stats are everything though and War Golem is 0.5 Mana behind its Mana cost.
If I had to discover between the 4 Mana 6/3 and War Golem, I would pick the 6/3 every time unless my hand is empty. At 4 Mana it is just much more playable than a 7 Mana klutz.
Waxadred is absolutely terrible dude, unless you like to play some meme deck
Waxadred is literally a better version of Faldorei Strider in almost all instances. It's a 5 mana 7/5 that shuffles up to infinite 7/5s into your deck, vs a 4/4 that shuffles 3 and was basically a staple.
I will admit that it loses the chance to get multiples in a turn but the free value more than makes up for it. And if you do something like Necrium it or run Shadow you can Stowaway for 5 mana 18/14.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Some people took this thread too seriously
Really can't you spend two more seconds of thinking before writing such posts? Like what has this even to do with this thread?
There are plenty of tutor cards that draw cards for a cheaper price than AI. like Forge of Souls or Juicy Psychmelon, or Pre-nerf Raiding Party. Then there is also UI, where the card draw is technically free as the other stats already make up 10 Mana. The new 5 Mana 5/5 dragon draws 1 for 0.5!
Nourishwas mostly played for Mana Crystals when UI was released.
To further clarify what I mean, Blizzard could print a card like 2 Mana "If you are holding a Dragon (or any other minor condition), draw 2 cards" or 2 Mana "Draw 2 Mage Minions from your deck" or "Draw 2 Spells that cost (5) or more". The conditions or requirements on such cards would be minor but they could very well exist by the parameters of Hearthstone, and would replace AI or make it a secondary inclusion in dedicated archetypes.
I completely agree with you that AI is a good card, but not due to its numbers but due to being a key gameplan component of many decks. And yes there are much worse draw cards like post-nerf Nourish, Novice Engineer or Sprint.
You are absolutely correct, War Golem is the weakest card in the entire game. The formula to calculate hoch much mana is spent on minion stats is (Attack+Health-1)/2). 0.5 values can then be rounded up or down because half Mana crystals don't exist.
(7+7-1)/2=6.5
So War Golem is 6.5 Mana of stats and he has no card text, but costs 7 Mana.
He shares that attribute with Magma Rager and Am'gam Rager who are both 2.5 Mana vanillas rounded up to 3. But those two, being elementals and having synergies attached to their stats (1 Attack or 1 Health synergies), are a little stronger than poor War Golem.
Now If you use my formula above on Malorne, you will see that he couldn't be much stronger as he already is above curve in stats. And back in his own set days, that meant a lot. Just...Boom was the same but better.
War Golem on the other hand could be better. A 7 Mana 7/8 Vanilla would be very possible, and even an 8/8 (7.5 Mana rounded down) is within the limits of Hearthstone.
I mainly used Malorne [/card]as an example because there are plenty of [card]Malornes in every set, cards that by using the formula above should be good but are not. Actually Gruul is the first Malorne, already outclassed by Ragnaros, the Fire Lord.
But you can give other examples it doesn't just have to be all about stats. Just write what you think :)
More examples:
Good card that is bad: Light's Justice if Paladin had Weapon Buffs, this would be strong. 1 Mana, 4 Damage (compare Heroic Strike), with buffs the shift towards durability would be an upside
Bad card that is good: Leeroy Jenkins I mean, the class with Fireball doesn't play him for a reason. But reducing your opponents life to 0 is what wins you the game and the other classes burst options are much more limited. Leeroy clearly has an awful statline when compared with other Charge Minions and also a drawback attached to it, but the extreme shift towards Attack unfound on other Charge cards make him a strong source of burst damage for many decks.
I still don't agree with the sentiment that there are several better card draw effects in the game (or any in standard). At least in my opinion.
I grant you UI, but UI is also perhaps one of the best cards in Hearthstone history. It's also on such a larger scale (mana- and effect wise) that they are less comparable, I think.
UI is also the reason (which I can see) that Nourish was pushed towards ramp - other than this period of co-existence, and in specifically Ramp Druid decks, it's my impression that it's been a draw card unless you 1) have another Nourish in hand, or 2) already have your powerful 7-8-9 mana cards in hand.
Pre-nerf Raiding Party was perhaps better, but also doubly conditional (combo + draw specifically pirates). Post-nerf it's much worse than AI, imo.
Forge of Souls is very conditional, and was at most a one-off in weapon heavy decks. You don't want to draw weapons successively or at the same time, because you can only make use of one of them in a turn.
EDIT: Psychmelon is on paper decent for combo or ramp decks, but hasn't seen a lot of play outside Maly/Tog shenanigans, I believe? I just don't think you want to draw your most expensive cards five turns before you can make use of them, unless you're playing specifically combo decks.
Look at that vanilla 4 mana 6/3 from the Gadgetzan expansion. Enough said. You are not correct. Please do not insist, I have more examples. Many cards are made to be useless and war golem isn't the worst of them and Ben Brode has never ever ever ever said that war golem is "the worst card", this is you and you alone.
Not gonna talk about the op's shitty formula that only takes stats into account and means absolutely nothing.
I didn't say it was a bad thread. On the contrary, it's already proving to be a fine opportunity for people to learn why they should have known better in the first place.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
It is not important if War Golem is the actual, literal, very worst card. That's not the point of this conversation.
The point is that it's terrible, and a good player doesn't need to experiment with it to know that. Hannya showed you an actual tweet in which Brode says "it might as well not exist," which is exactly the point he was trying to make.
When you take an obviously (though mildly) exaggerated statement and parse it as literal, it's not Hannya who ends up looking foolish.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Gruul is an awful card. And not because Rag outclasses it.
Obviously you're super reasonable after the OP proves you wrong, and being given a direct quote from the former Game Director stating that the card is utterly useless. Totally open to a change of open.
Mr "War Golem was never considered the worst card in the game by anyone other than you right now."
By the way, there's a reason your Reno deck is hard stuck at 20.
Seems you haven't been around in the Classic meta days. The classic set doesn't have many high cost minions. Alexstrasza and Malygos were used for combos, but the other high cost neutral legendaries like Gruul or Onyxia were precisely not played because Ragnaros was straight up better than them.
Gruul even had a combo back then with the unnerfed perma stealth rogue hof card.
You're right, I wasn't around until after Whisper of the Old Gods. But I can't see a reason why you would have to put an 8-9 mana legendary in every deck? So I'm just saying Rag likely wasn't the reason why Kruul didn't see play. I think Onyxia is miles better, because Kruul is really, really bad.
Conceal only gave stealth until your next turn - so that would be a two card, 9 mana combo to attack with an 8/8... one turn delayed. Sounds bad. But again, I didn't play all the way back when.
EDIT: Forgot it used to be perma-stealth, pre-nerf. And 0 mana. And it still sounds bad with Kruul :P
He said it could be removed, but that's because it's arguably the most vanilla card in the game. But theres definitely worse than just a 7 man and 7/7. Silverback patriarch is arguably a dead card more often. The nerfed arcane golem is 100% worse, and would lose you way more games than a vanilla 7/7 that at the very least must be answered.
Anub'arak is bad but good (Hit hard and great dr effect, repeatable pressure every turn.... theoretically)
Rhok'delar Is good but bad (i mean, those stats and such a massive restriction? But it worked :) )
Talk about reasonable. My point has never been that war golem is worth playing. Just that it is not the worst game in the game, as I proved, and that Ben brode never said anything like that in his tweet, and I've never seen before someone claim war golem is the absolute worst card, I'm not proven wrong, despite being off topic. And the op's formula is absolutely worthless I'm sorry to insist. According to his formula, a vanilla 10 mana 0/500 would be the best card in the game.
Now let me apologize and leave, this is a nice thread and I don't mean to ruin it.
Ehh it's not my formula it is just how things are.
It's like saying that you don't like that 2+2=4.
And a Vanilla 10 Mana 0/500 would be completely busted and also not possible by the formula. There are cards like Lady in White or Inner Fire you know.
But it would certainly not be the best card in the game as stats aren't everything.
When it comes to Vanille minions, stats are everything though and War Golem is 0.5 Mana behind its Mana cost.
If I had to discover between the 4 Mana 6/3 and War Golem, I would pick the 6/3 every time unless my hand is empty. At 4 Mana it is just much more playable than a 7 Mana klutz.
Waxadred is literally a better version of Faldorei Strider in almost all instances. It's a 5 mana 7/5 that shuffles up to infinite 7/5s into your deck, vs a 4/4 that shuffles 3 and was basically a staple.
I will admit that it loses the chance to get multiples in a turn but the free value more than makes up for it. And if you do something like Necrium it or run Shadow you can Stowaway for 5 mana 18/14.